If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please note that posts from new users are now moderated. If you have just joined this forum and post a new message it will be held in the moderation queue until a member of staff approves it. Please be patient and our staff will review your submission as soon as possible.

Re: colloquial english

The contraction ain't is a widespread colloquialism. It's generally considered standard English (BBC is, for instance, very fond of it), and it can be seldom found in formal writing.
Your sentence does sound ''colloquial'', and I'd not recommend it for some instances too formal, but it's in no way ''low class''.

Re: colloquial english

Originally Posted by IvanV

Since when, MrPedantic? I think that calling it ''low class'' might sound a bit too harsh.

Hello Ivan,

I use "low class" in the context of the distinction in the original question. Generally, I would call "ain't" non-standard, in BrE; sometimes (for instance) BrE speakers whose English is otherwise standard will throw in an "ain't" for mildly humorous effect (e.g. "It ain't necessarily so"). The mild humour depends on the non-standard status of "ain't".

(By the way, although my earlier post has the air of a direct contradiction of yours, you weren't there when I began to answer. So no brusqueness intended.)